When reservation of seats in Government and private colleges, jobs in private and public institutions are made on the basis of sex, religion, castes, economic status etc. we are not giving justice to all citizens of India equally. Members of so-called weaker and socially backward communities becoming more and more influential and richer, and members of so-called socially forward communities are becoming more and more poorer and lose importance in the society. Even after 60 years of Independence is it necessary to have reservations? It is a mockery of Indian Constitution by not encouraging meritorious candidates to shine and driving them out to foreign countries to shine. All Indians should be treated alike and there should not be any difference because of gender, caste or social status. Let us do away with the policy of reservation and do not deprive the opportunities of meritorious persons to shine. Let us not insult the various communities highlighting their castes and not allowing them to compete as Indians in general. All are equal before Law. I suggest that we should not isolate any community in the name of caste or religion.There should not be reservations to anybody in the name of caste or gender. We are insulting the beneficiaries of reservation by highlighting their castes. All should be treated equally. If father is a doctor son cannot be treated as a doctor unless he posseses the necessary qualifications of a doctor by hardwork. So also one should not be treated
RE:Reservation - Abue as argument
by bracelet grace on Aug 15, 2007 11:46 AM Permalink
100% reservation is a must from the standpoint of social justice and principles of Mother Nature. If a mother has ten children and if a few of them are poor and the remaining are rich she will not at all feel happy over rich children but will feel totally dejected over poor ones. This is law of Mother Nature. Another law of nature is that cutting across all religious, social etc. divisions 70% of the population are shirkers and only 30% are workers. This is because 80% of air is inactive nitorgen and only 19% is active Oxygen, the proportion having been fixed after very careful thought by Nature to ensure that the earth is not rendered clean-shaven and ecology upset within a very short time. Allowing 30% workers to gain upper-hand is, therefore, not acceptable to Mother Nature, both from the point of view of clean-shaving but alaso from the point of view of humanism, self-respect and exploitation of majority etc. It has also to be understood that thermodynamic laws ensure that every work result in around 70% loss and entropy and consequently there is no chance of any post, whether white collar or labour-intensive, being good or lucrative. So all posts are exploitative only in proportion to their lucrativeness. Thus scientific laws ensure that the more one is meritorious, the more one is exploitative and that is why merit has not been able to gain acceptance or even accommodation by humanists. The advocates of meritocracy should clearly appreciate this great drawback
